- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Ideal scenario where there could be unilateral support among all Saints fans
Posted on 4/8/25 at 10:05 am to Snipe
Posted on 4/8/25 at 10:05 am to Snipe
quote:
More likely Pittsburgh trade up from 21.
Trade scenario from RJackson would be like
Pitt #9
NOR #21, 3rd rd pick Mid 80ish, 2026 1st Rd pick .
This is very similar to what KC did to trade up from 27 to 10 to get Mahomes.
Pitt makes more sense, but they would likely talk to Carolina to get in front of us (aka the Mahomes situation)
1
Posted on 4/8/25 at 10:07 am to uptowntiger84
quote:
You don't trade this years 1st for two 2nd round picks.
i wasn't.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 10:29 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
If we are not getting a 1st round pick, I am not interested in moving out of the 1st round entirely.
You don’t move out the top 10 to the 2nd round without next years first. Will need more than just the first to be honest. I’d be fine if they would get all that.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 10:51 am to Chad504boy
To move out of the 1st entirely, we better get their 2nd this year and their 1st and 3rd next year, at a minimum.
My starting price in the negotiations would be
2025 2nd
2025 3rd
2026 1st
2026 2nd
If they desperately want to get back into the top 10 for a QB, you ask for the farm, not "fair value"
My starting price in the negotiations would be
2025 2nd
2025 3rd
2026 1st
2026 2nd
If they desperately want to get back into the top 10 for a QB, you ask for the farm, not "fair value"
Posted on 4/8/25 at 11:03 am to Chad504boy
quote:except that it doesn't. It would require next year's pick be a 1st rounder. A future pick is not valued the same as a current year pick.
you can say whatever you want but the draft value chart math checks out.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 11:06 am to Fun Bunch
quote:quote:
Saints acquire browns 2nd round pick 33 (first of day 2), 3rd round pick 67 and next year's 2nd. Maye toss in a pick swap next year. That gives us now 5 picks in 2nd and 3rd round this year.
That is terrible value for a trade back from 9 to 33.
9 for 33 is a terrible trade. 9 for 33 & 67 is a winner for the Saints in terms of value and if they get next year's 2nd in the process it is a steal. In fact, this year's 2nd and next year's 2nd is a win. This year's 1st for the browns 3rd(67)and next year's 1st would be a win as well.
https://overthecap.com/trade-calculator
This post was edited on 4/8/25 at 11:07 am
Posted on 4/8/25 at 11:15 am to mdomingue
quote:
9 for 33 is a terrible trade. 9 for 33 & 67 is a winner for the Saints in terms of value and if they get next year's 2nd in the process it is a steal. In fact, this year's 2nd and next year's 2nd is a win. This year's 1st for the browns 3rd(67)and next year's 1st would be a win as well.
LINK ]
ahh, someone without their head up their arse.
This post was edited on 4/8/25 at 11:16 am
Posted on 4/8/25 at 11:19 am to mdomingue
Lol ok.
First of all the numbers are simply wrong. Next year's 2nd is worth less (substantially) than this year's 2nd.
No team in this era is going to move out of the top 10, out of the 1st round completely, and not get a 1st at all in return, unless a player of value is involved.
First of all the numbers are simply wrong. Next year's 2nd is worth less (substantially) than this year's 2nd.
No team in this era is going to move out of the top 10, out of the 1st round completely, and not get a 1st at all in return, unless a player of value is involved.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 11:20 am to Chad504boy
quote:
ahh, someone without their head up their arse.
Give me a minute
Posted on 4/8/25 at 11:21 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Lol ok.
First of all the numbers are simply wrong. Next year's 2nd is worth less (substantially) than this year's 2nd.
No team in this era is going to move out of the top 10, out of the 1st round completely, and not get a 1st at all in return, unless a player of value is involved.
You know better than anyone else, we get it.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 11:22 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Next year's 2nd is worth less (substantially) than this year's 2nd.
there's no absolute measurement of that bunch. its a bit of a fallacy. Even trying to gauge next year's 2nd from the top of the round value to bottom round value is a huge flux. i gave it about mid 2nd rd value... very fair for estimation.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 11:23 am to mdomingue
quote:
No team in this era is going to move out of the top 10, out of the 1st round completely, and not get a 1st at all in return
getting pick 33 yet we're still making loud noises over the label of a first round pick.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 11:44 am to Chad504boy
This is the dumbest fricking idea and a trade rape of epic proportions. We are all now dumber for even reading this.
Trading from 33 to 9 would require multiple first round picks most likely.
Trading from 33 to 9 would require multiple first round picks most likely.
This post was edited on 4/8/25 at 11:45 am
Posted on 4/8/25 at 12:02 pm to Chad504boy
9th 1350
for
33 580
67 255
next years 2nd is valued as a high end 3 so another 260ish
youd need another 2 to be even
for
33 580
67 255
next years 2nd is valued as a high end 3 so another 260ish
youd need another 2 to be even
Posted on 4/8/25 at 12:04 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Pitt makes more sense, but they would likely talk to Carolina to get in front of us (aka the Mahomes situation)
Maybe but if Loomis is in contact with them as lets them know if Sanders falls they would have an interest in trading down? One spot could save a little draft capital for them?
I'm just lookin at it from a stand point where the Saints don't get screwed every time. lol I know that's a tall ask.
fwiw I do not think Sanders makes it out of the top 7.
This post was edited on 4/8/25 at 3:44 pm
Posted on 4/8/25 at 12:40 pm to htran90
quote:
next years 2nd is valued as a high end 3 so another 260ish
You know that’s not really a rule in stone huh
Posted on 4/8/25 at 12:57 pm to mdomingue
quote:
9 for 33 is a terrible trade. 9 for 33 & 67 is a winner for the Saints in terms of value and if they get next year's 2nd in the process it is a steal. In fact, this year's 2nd and next year's 2nd is a win. This year's 1st for the browns 3rd(67)and next year's 1st would be a win as well.
Y’all are either beyond retarded or trolling your asses off. Even the title suggests that Chad is just in a Chad mood and looking to do his dumb arguing thing.
This post was edited on 4/8/25 at 1:00 pm
Posted on 4/8/25 at 1:08 pm to Chad504boy
quote:It doesn't. Future picks are valued a round down, so the 2nd next year is only 78 points, meaning there's a 50+ point gap in the value.
the draft value chart math checks out
Not to mention teams moving into the top 10 still tend to overpay (or at most accurately pay) to move up, so there would need to be another 2nd or 3rd rounder added in here from next year.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 1:11 pm to bonethug0180
quote:We can’t have a real conversation if you gonna say dumb shite like this
so the 2nd next year is only 78 points,
This post was edited on 4/8/25 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 4/8/25 at 1:21 pm to St Augustine
quote:
Y’all are either beyond retarded or trolling your asses off.
The draft needs to hurry up & get here. All the different mocks, analysis, social media discussion & television talk is causing insanity. This whole draft process has become over saturated with useless information.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News